rbernie
Contributing Member
I've heard good and not-so-good about the Ohio Ord receivers - what's the straight scoop? Are they worth using to build up a couple of cheap Romanian kits?
Ohio Ordnance AK receivers
- Thread starter rbernie
- Start date
- Status
noresttill
Member
- Joined
- Dec 29, 2005
- Messages
- 329
I used a NodakSpud/DCI industries receiver (Model NDS-3). they are the economy ones, so there is no step down rail, but they are drilled for the romy, heat treated, and fit nice...cheap too.
http://www.nodakspud.com/
Jesse
http://www.nodakspud.com/
Jesse
OOW were the best you could get for awhile. Now there are better options (DCI and global for example) but its not like the OOW is bad. Many AKs have been built on them. If you're doing it yourself make sure to check the length of the receiver, IIRC the OOW receivers were slightly long.
Gun Wielding Maniac
Member
I've built several AK's on OOW receivers.
Honestly, I would avoid them at the present. Formerly, they were a good choice when nothing better was out, but we have more options now.
The OOW receivers have the selector hole slightly lower on the receiver then is standard. This results in a gap between the top cover and the safety catch with the safety on. Some people find this unsightly.
The receiver is heat treated only at the holes for the axis pins, rather then all over.
Also, the OOW receivers generally are not the correct overall length. They must be trimmed at the front and rear with an angle grinder or some other device before you drill the front and rear trunnion holes. This is irritating and the source of occasional errors. It is very easy to forget to trim for length first before drilling the trunnion holes. If you do this and rivet in the trunnions, the result will be that the bolt carrier will not want to lock into the receiver as the gap at the rear is too big. Also, the top cover will be too short and will constantly pop off while you are shooting.
Go for a DCI receiver or even a Ewbanks type 3 before the OOW.
Honestly, I would avoid them at the present. Formerly, they were a good choice when nothing better was out, but we have more options now.
The OOW receivers have the selector hole slightly lower on the receiver then is standard. This results in a gap between the top cover and the safety catch with the safety on. Some people find this unsightly.
The receiver is heat treated only at the holes for the axis pins, rather then all over.
Also, the OOW receivers generally are not the correct overall length. They must be trimmed at the front and rear with an angle grinder or some other device before you drill the front and rear trunnion holes. This is irritating and the source of occasional errors. It is very easy to forget to trim for length first before drilling the trunnion holes. If you do this and rivet in the trunnions, the result will be that the bolt carrier will not want to lock into the receiver as the gap at the rear is too big. Also, the top cover will be too short and will constantly pop off while you are shooting.
Go for a DCI receiver or even a Ewbanks type 3 before the OOW.
I thought they fixed the selector hole issue? If not, it'd be a no brainer to avoid them IMO. Never did like the circles from the heat treating either.
The length is an easy fix I thought. Rivet in the front trunnion, put the top cover on and mark where the rear trunnion needs to be? I'll defer to people that have actually done builds though.
The length is an easy fix I thought. Rivet in the front trunnion, put the top cover on and mark where the rear trunnion needs to be? I'll defer to people that have actually done builds though.
- Status